How much would a 1 foot tall human weigh?What kind of weapon would enable fairies to defend against the invading 13th century medieval army?How could giant intelligent creatures afford to live in a human-majority civilisation?Non-Magic, Real-Life Faries?What are the quirks of half-breed slavery?What kind of weapons would a much smaller species use to fight humansHow fast could a bird-like human fly under optimal conditions?

How can I swallow pills more easily?

Memory models for assembly libraries for Turbo C

Speeding up sums involving 16x16 matrices and 16x16x16x16 antisymmetric tensor

Do Klingons have escape pods?

Contacted by head of school regarding an issue - should I be worried?

Algorithmic thinking problems

Is there a word/phrase that can describe playing a musical instrument in a casual way?

"the whole shabang" vs "the whole shebang"

Exactly what color was the text on monochrome terminals with green-on-black and amber-on-black screens?

Is it necessary to wipe out vile man-eating dragons?

How can I speed up secure erasing of a disk?

Why does the Eurofighter Typhoon pitch up on brake release?

Big equation writing in LaTeX

A New Math Operation?

Why is an array's dimension part of its type?

Suppose I capture encrypted data that I want to decrypt. Could I use a server farm to decrypt?

Is Chika Ofili's method for checking divisibility for 7 a "new discovery" in math?

How to assign a value to a variable in Terminal?

According to who?

How do I negotiate salary when returning to a position I just left?

How to tell that this is a draw

Can I regain some of my normal hit points while I have a buffer of temporary hit points?

Who is Gail Gasram?

How can you weaponize a thermos?



How much would a 1 foot tall human weigh?


What kind of weapon would enable fairies to defend against the invading 13th century medieval army?How could giant intelligent creatures afford to live in a human-majority civilisation?Non-Magic, Real-Life Faries?What are the quirks of half-breed slavery?What kind of weapons would a much smaller species use to fight humansHow fast could a bird-like human fly under optimal conditions?






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty
margin-bottom:0;

.everyonelovesstackoverflowposition:absolute;height:1px;width:1px;opacity:0;top:0;left:0;pointer-events:none;








10















$begingroup$


Trying to figure out how much a 1 foot tall fairy would realistically weigh using these 2 guidelines



  1. Fairies are just scaled down humans.

  2. Their bones are not hollow because their flight is assisted by magic.









share|improve this question











$endgroup$










  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Are you specifically referring to the square-cube law in your question? If not, then please elaborate further on the restrictions being placed.
    $endgroup$
    – Andrew Fan
    Sep 14 at 0:03










  • $begingroup$
    Small beings usually have very thin extremities, compared to tall ones. Consider e.g. the legs when comparing the mouse against the elephant. Please elaborate to the comment from @AndrewFan
    $endgroup$
    – hitchhiker
    Sep 14 at 19:54

















10















$begingroup$


Trying to figure out how much a 1 foot tall fairy would realistically weigh using these 2 guidelines



  1. Fairies are just scaled down humans.

  2. Their bones are not hollow because their flight is assisted by magic.









share|improve this question











$endgroup$










  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Are you specifically referring to the square-cube law in your question? If not, then please elaborate further on the restrictions being placed.
    $endgroup$
    – Andrew Fan
    Sep 14 at 0:03










  • $begingroup$
    Small beings usually have very thin extremities, compared to tall ones. Consider e.g. the legs when comparing the mouse against the elephant. Please elaborate to the comment from @AndrewFan
    $endgroup$
    – hitchhiker
    Sep 14 at 19:54













10













10









10





$begingroup$


Trying to figure out how much a 1 foot tall fairy would realistically weigh using these 2 guidelines



  1. Fairies are just scaled down humans.

  2. Their bones are not hollow because their flight is assisted by magic.









share|improve this question











$endgroup$




Trying to figure out how much a 1 foot tall fairy would realistically weigh using these 2 guidelines



  1. Fairies are just scaled down humans.

  2. Their bones are not hollow because their flight is assisted by magic.






biology fantasy-races scaling






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Sep 14 at 16:15









Cyn says make Monica whole

19.4k2 gold badges38 silver badges88 bronze badges




19.4k2 gold badges38 silver badges88 bronze badges










asked Sep 13 at 21:13









SamirahSamirah

1012 bronze badges




1012 bronze badges










  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Are you specifically referring to the square-cube law in your question? If not, then please elaborate further on the restrictions being placed.
    $endgroup$
    – Andrew Fan
    Sep 14 at 0:03










  • $begingroup$
    Small beings usually have very thin extremities, compared to tall ones. Consider e.g. the legs when comparing the mouse against the elephant. Please elaborate to the comment from @AndrewFan
    $endgroup$
    – hitchhiker
    Sep 14 at 19:54












  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Are you specifically referring to the square-cube law in your question? If not, then please elaborate further on the restrictions being placed.
    $endgroup$
    – Andrew Fan
    Sep 14 at 0:03










  • $begingroup$
    Small beings usually have very thin extremities, compared to tall ones. Consider e.g. the legs when comparing the mouse against the elephant. Please elaborate to the comment from @AndrewFan
    $endgroup$
    – hitchhiker
    Sep 14 at 19:54







1




1




$begingroup$
Are you specifically referring to the square-cube law in your question? If not, then please elaborate further on the restrictions being placed.
$endgroup$
– Andrew Fan
Sep 14 at 0:03




$begingroup$
Are you specifically referring to the square-cube law in your question? If not, then please elaborate further on the restrictions being placed.
$endgroup$
– Andrew Fan
Sep 14 at 0:03












$begingroup$
Small beings usually have very thin extremities, compared to tall ones. Consider e.g. the legs when comparing the mouse against the elephant. Please elaborate to the comment from @AndrewFan
$endgroup$
– hitchhiker
Sep 14 at 19:54




$begingroup$
Small beings usually have very thin extremities, compared to tall ones. Consider e.g. the legs when comparing the mouse against the elephant. Please elaborate to the comment from @AndrewFan
$endgroup$
– hitchhiker
Sep 14 at 19:54










5 Answers
5






active

oldest

votes


















10

















$begingroup$

For uniformly scaled down humans (as opposed to real life short humans), result would be simple as



$$m_fairy = M_human * (fracH_fairyH_human)^3$$



Assuming the fairy is 1 foot tall and her real life prototype is 5'6" and 120 lbs we get 0.72 pounds or 11.5 ounces.






share|improve this answer










$endgroup$














  • $begingroup$
    What if her prototype is Cara Delavingne?
    $endgroup$
    – Harper - Reinstate Monica
    Sep 14 at 22:38







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @ Harper Cara Jocelyn Delevingne is reportedly 173 cm tall and 51 kg light. Putting it to the formula gives 279 g, or 9.8 ounces.
    $endgroup$
    – Alexander
    Sep 14 at 23:43


















9

















$begingroup$

Comparison with other humans



We can almost look at a real live example: https://www.oddee.com/item_97186.aspx



Edward Nino Hernandez is about 70 cm tall (~2 foot) and weighs 10 kg. We can actually use this to test the square-cube-law, proposed in other answers:



$$m_textfairy = 80 mathrmkg cdot left(frac0.7 mathrm m1.8 mathrm mright)^3= 4.7 mathrmkg$$



So they are off by a factor of 2.



Comparison with monkeys



Let's have a look at monkeys: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamarin



The Tamarin can grow up to $30 mathrmcm$, which is just about 1 foot and heaviest specimen weigh up to $0.9 mathrmkg$ (other units can be found in the article).



The squirrel monkey (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_American_squirrel_monkey) also grows up to about $30 mathrmcm$ and has a maximum weight of about $0.95 mathrmkg$



Comparision with a penguin



Another animal I could think of, that is roughly that size.
Penguin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_penguin): $1.5 mathrmkg$



Conclusion



So in conclusion I would estimate the human to weigh round about $1 mathrmkg-1.5 mathrmkg$, which is just a little over $2 mathrmlbs-3 mathrmlbs$.






share|improve this answer












$endgroup$










  • 4




    $begingroup$
    I upvoted this answer just for sweet metric units!
    $endgroup$
    – polfosol
    Sep 14 at 13:25










  • $begingroup$
    Why was this downvoted? Please clarify
    $endgroup$
    – infinitezero
    Sep 14 at 14:28


















7

















$begingroup$

Well, if they are literally just humans of the exact same proportions, but scaled up or down, we can use the Square-Cube Law to figure it out in both cases.



The skinny version is, if I understand this correctly, take this equation:



V2 = V1 ( l2 / l1 )^3



where V2 is your new Volume, V1 is the original Volume, l2 is the new length and l1 is the original length, and assume for simplicity's sake that volume exactly correlates with mass, and therefore weight.



So if a reasonably well-fed human is 6ft tall and 180lbs, then an exact scaled-up giant version at 12ft tall would be 2x the height, and therefore the weight is 180(12/6)^3, or 1,440 lbs. That's a lot.



Turning this around, if this 6ft, 180lbs human is scaled down to 1ft tall, then we're looking for 180(1/6)^3, which is about 0.83333.



So your fairies would weigh less than one pound each, with the exception of some who are enormous by fairy standards.



You can use this to get a rough estimate of weights for all sorts of creatures, big or small. Take an animal that looks the most like what you want to make, plug in its bodily proportions, and presto you have a rough idea of how much the new version should weigh. You'd be surprised just how heavy your giants are and how light the dwarfs are.






share|improve this answer










$endgroup$






















    3

















    $begingroup$

    A 30cm fairy would need a lot less muscle relatively than a normally sized person. (Note that with a normal amount of muscle, they'd be able to jump nearly as high absolutely as a big person). They'd look probably quite skinny, and weigh less than the square-cube law would suggest, maybe 0.3kg.






    share|improve this answer












    $endgroup$






















      1

















      $begingroup$

      Other answers have scaled the persons' mass by the cube of their height, and got answers of about 13 ounces. This is probably a lower bound; it assumes that a human brain can fit into a space slightly larger than a teaspoonful.



      The theory of "Body Mass Index" (BMI) is that people have the longest life when their mass is roughly proportional to the square of their height. If we start with 6 feet = 180 pounds (a BMI of 24.4 kg/m²), we can extrapolate this to 1 foot = 5 pounds. This is probably an upper bound; it allows a few cubic inches for the brain.



      An elliptical cylinder of water with a width of 5.4 inches, a height of 12 inches, and a depth of 2.7 inches would have a mass of five pounds. The ellipse's perimeter would be 13 inches, which is quite stout. (6 * 13" is a 78" waist!)



      An elliptical cylinder of water with a width of 2.2 inches, a height of 12 inches, and a depth of 1.1 inches would have a mass of 13 ounces, and a BMI of 4 kg/m². The ellipse's perimeter would be 5.3 inches, which is scaled down from a 32 inch waist.






      share|improve this answer












      $endgroup$










      • 2




        $begingroup$
        Going by BMI is a recipe to estimate a real-life dwarf. If you try to picture your water cylinders, at 1 foot tall we would get a person of cartoon proportions (which might be Ok).
        $endgroup$
        – Alexander
        Sep 14 at 2:22










      • $begingroup$
        BMI is entirely the wrong tool here. It doesn't accurately approximate either actual human scaling or theoretical square-cube scaling.
        $endgroup$
        – Mark
        Sep 14 at 23:39












      Your Answer








      StackExchange.ready(function()
      var channelOptions =
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "579"
      ;
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
      createEditor();
      );

      else
      createEditor();

      );

      function createEditor()
      StackExchange.prepareEditor(
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader:
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      ,
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      );



      );














      draft saved

      draft discarded
















      StackExchange.ready(
      function ()
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f156098%2fhow-much-would-a-1-foot-tall-human-weigh%23new-answer', 'question_page');

      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown


























      5 Answers
      5






      active

      oldest

      votes








      5 Answers
      5






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      10

















      $begingroup$

      For uniformly scaled down humans (as opposed to real life short humans), result would be simple as



      $$m_fairy = M_human * (fracH_fairyH_human)^3$$



      Assuming the fairy is 1 foot tall and her real life prototype is 5'6" and 120 lbs we get 0.72 pounds or 11.5 ounces.






      share|improve this answer










      $endgroup$














      • $begingroup$
        What if her prototype is Cara Delavingne?
        $endgroup$
        – Harper - Reinstate Monica
        Sep 14 at 22:38







      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @ Harper Cara Jocelyn Delevingne is reportedly 173 cm tall and 51 kg light. Putting it to the formula gives 279 g, or 9.8 ounces.
        $endgroup$
        – Alexander
        Sep 14 at 23:43















      10

















      $begingroup$

      For uniformly scaled down humans (as opposed to real life short humans), result would be simple as



      $$m_fairy = M_human * (fracH_fairyH_human)^3$$



      Assuming the fairy is 1 foot tall and her real life prototype is 5'6" and 120 lbs we get 0.72 pounds or 11.5 ounces.






      share|improve this answer










      $endgroup$














      • $begingroup$
        What if her prototype is Cara Delavingne?
        $endgroup$
        – Harper - Reinstate Monica
        Sep 14 at 22:38







      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @ Harper Cara Jocelyn Delevingne is reportedly 173 cm tall and 51 kg light. Putting it to the formula gives 279 g, or 9.8 ounces.
        $endgroup$
        – Alexander
        Sep 14 at 23:43













      10















      10











      10







      $begingroup$

      For uniformly scaled down humans (as opposed to real life short humans), result would be simple as



      $$m_fairy = M_human * (fracH_fairyH_human)^3$$



      Assuming the fairy is 1 foot tall and her real life prototype is 5'6" and 120 lbs we get 0.72 pounds or 11.5 ounces.






      share|improve this answer










      $endgroup$



      For uniformly scaled down humans (as opposed to real life short humans), result would be simple as



      $$m_fairy = M_human * (fracH_fairyH_human)^3$$



      Assuming the fairy is 1 foot tall and her real life prototype is 5'6" and 120 lbs we get 0.72 pounds or 11.5 ounces.







      share|improve this answer













      share|improve this answer




      share|improve this answer










      answered Sep 13 at 21:55









      AlexanderAlexander

      26.6k5 gold badges41 silver badges101 bronze badges




      26.6k5 gold badges41 silver badges101 bronze badges














      • $begingroup$
        What if her prototype is Cara Delavingne?
        $endgroup$
        – Harper - Reinstate Monica
        Sep 14 at 22:38







      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @ Harper Cara Jocelyn Delevingne is reportedly 173 cm tall and 51 kg light. Putting it to the formula gives 279 g, or 9.8 ounces.
        $endgroup$
        – Alexander
        Sep 14 at 23:43
















      • $begingroup$
        What if her prototype is Cara Delavingne?
        $endgroup$
        – Harper - Reinstate Monica
        Sep 14 at 22:38







      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @ Harper Cara Jocelyn Delevingne is reportedly 173 cm tall and 51 kg light. Putting it to the formula gives 279 g, or 9.8 ounces.
        $endgroup$
        – Alexander
        Sep 14 at 23:43















      $begingroup$
      What if her prototype is Cara Delavingne?
      $endgroup$
      – Harper - Reinstate Monica
      Sep 14 at 22:38





      $begingroup$
      What if her prototype is Cara Delavingne?
      $endgroup$
      – Harper - Reinstate Monica
      Sep 14 at 22:38





      1




      1




      $begingroup$
      @ Harper Cara Jocelyn Delevingne is reportedly 173 cm tall and 51 kg light. Putting it to the formula gives 279 g, or 9.8 ounces.
      $endgroup$
      – Alexander
      Sep 14 at 23:43




      $begingroup$
      @ Harper Cara Jocelyn Delevingne is reportedly 173 cm tall and 51 kg light. Putting it to the formula gives 279 g, or 9.8 ounces.
      $endgroup$
      – Alexander
      Sep 14 at 23:43













      9

















      $begingroup$

      Comparison with other humans



      We can almost look at a real live example: https://www.oddee.com/item_97186.aspx



      Edward Nino Hernandez is about 70 cm tall (~2 foot) and weighs 10 kg. We can actually use this to test the square-cube-law, proposed in other answers:



      $$m_textfairy = 80 mathrmkg cdot left(frac0.7 mathrm m1.8 mathrm mright)^3= 4.7 mathrmkg$$



      So they are off by a factor of 2.



      Comparison with monkeys



      Let's have a look at monkeys: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamarin



      The Tamarin can grow up to $30 mathrmcm$, which is just about 1 foot and heaviest specimen weigh up to $0.9 mathrmkg$ (other units can be found in the article).



      The squirrel monkey (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_American_squirrel_monkey) also grows up to about $30 mathrmcm$ and has a maximum weight of about $0.95 mathrmkg$



      Comparision with a penguin



      Another animal I could think of, that is roughly that size.
      Penguin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_penguin): $1.5 mathrmkg$



      Conclusion



      So in conclusion I would estimate the human to weigh round about $1 mathrmkg-1.5 mathrmkg$, which is just a little over $2 mathrmlbs-3 mathrmlbs$.






      share|improve this answer












      $endgroup$










      • 4




        $begingroup$
        I upvoted this answer just for sweet metric units!
        $endgroup$
        – polfosol
        Sep 14 at 13:25










      • $begingroup$
        Why was this downvoted? Please clarify
        $endgroup$
        – infinitezero
        Sep 14 at 14:28















      9

















      $begingroup$

      Comparison with other humans



      We can almost look at a real live example: https://www.oddee.com/item_97186.aspx



      Edward Nino Hernandez is about 70 cm tall (~2 foot) and weighs 10 kg. We can actually use this to test the square-cube-law, proposed in other answers:



      $$m_textfairy = 80 mathrmkg cdot left(frac0.7 mathrm m1.8 mathrm mright)^3= 4.7 mathrmkg$$



      So they are off by a factor of 2.



      Comparison with monkeys



      Let's have a look at monkeys: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamarin



      The Tamarin can grow up to $30 mathrmcm$, which is just about 1 foot and heaviest specimen weigh up to $0.9 mathrmkg$ (other units can be found in the article).



      The squirrel monkey (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_American_squirrel_monkey) also grows up to about $30 mathrmcm$ and has a maximum weight of about $0.95 mathrmkg$



      Comparision with a penguin



      Another animal I could think of, that is roughly that size.
      Penguin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_penguin): $1.5 mathrmkg$



      Conclusion



      So in conclusion I would estimate the human to weigh round about $1 mathrmkg-1.5 mathrmkg$, which is just a little over $2 mathrmlbs-3 mathrmlbs$.






      share|improve this answer












      $endgroup$










      • 4




        $begingroup$
        I upvoted this answer just for sweet metric units!
        $endgroup$
        – polfosol
        Sep 14 at 13:25










      • $begingroup$
        Why was this downvoted? Please clarify
        $endgroup$
        – infinitezero
        Sep 14 at 14:28













      9















      9











      9







      $begingroup$

      Comparison with other humans



      We can almost look at a real live example: https://www.oddee.com/item_97186.aspx



      Edward Nino Hernandez is about 70 cm tall (~2 foot) and weighs 10 kg. We can actually use this to test the square-cube-law, proposed in other answers:



      $$m_textfairy = 80 mathrmkg cdot left(frac0.7 mathrm m1.8 mathrm mright)^3= 4.7 mathrmkg$$



      So they are off by a factor of 2.



      Comparison with monkeys



      Let's have a look at monkeys: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamarin



      The Tamarin can grow up to $30 mathrmcm$, which is just about 1 foot and heaviest specimen weigh up to $0.9 mathrmkg$ (other units can be found in the article).



      The squirrel monkey (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_American_squirrel_monkey) also grows up to about $30 mathrmcm$ and has a maximum weight of about $0.95 mathrmkg$



      Comparision with a penguin



      Another animal I could think of, that is roughly that size.
      Penguin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_penguin): $1.5 mathrmkg$



      Conclusion



      So in conclusion I would estimate the human to weigh round about $1 mathrmkg-1.5 mathrmkg$, which is just a little over $2 mathrmlbs-3 mathrmlbs$.






      share|improve this answer












      $endgroup$



      Comparison with other humans



      We can almost look at a real live example: https://www.oddee.com/item_97186.aspx



      Edward Nino Hernandez is about 70 cm tall (~2 foot) and weighs 10 kg. We can actually use this to test the square-cube-law, proposed in other answers:



      $$m_textfairy = 80 mathrmkg cdot left(frac0.7 mathrm m1.8 mathrm mright)^3= 4.7 mathrmkg$$



      So they are off by a factor of 2.



      Comparison with monkeys



      Let's have a look at monkeys: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamarin



      The Tamarin can grow up to $30 mathrmcm$, which is just about 1 foot and heaviest specimen weigh up to $0.9 mathrmkg$ (other units can be found in the article).



      The squirrel monkey (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_American_squirrel_monkey) also grows up to about $30 mathrmcm$ and has a maximum weight of about $0.95 mathrmkg$



      Comparision with a penguin



      Another animal I could think of, that is roughly that size.
      Penguin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_penguin): $1.5 mathrmkg$



      Conclusion



      So in conclusion I would estimate the human to weigh round about $1 mathrmkg-1.5 mathrmkg$, which is just a little over $2 mathrmlbs-3 mathrmlbs$.







      share|improve this answer















      share|improve this answer




      share|improve this answer








      edited Sep 14 at 18:50









      Loong

      2764 silver badges12 bronze badges




      2764 silver badges12 bronze badges










      answered Sep 14 at 8:43









      infinitezeroinfinitezero

      5632 silver badges10 bronze badges




      5632 silver badges10 bronze badges










      • 4




        $begingroup$
        I upvoted this answer just for sweet metric units!
        $endgroup$
        – polfosol
        Sep 14 at 13:25










      • $begingroup$
        Why was this downvoted? Please clarify
        $endgroup$
        – infinitezero
        Sep 14 at 14:28












      • 4




        $begingroup$
        I upvoted this answer just for sweet metric units!
        $endgroup$
        – polfosol
        Sep 14 at 13:25










      • $begingroup$
        Why was this downvoted? Please clarify
        $endgroup$
        – infinitezero
        Sep 14 at 14:28







      4




      4




      $begingroup$
      I upvoted this answer just for sweet metric units!
      $endgroup$
      – polfosol
      Sep 14 at 13:25




      $begingroup$
      I upvoted this answer just for sweet metric units!
      $endgroup$
      – polfosol
      Sep 14 at 13:25












      $begingroup$
      Why was this downvoted? Please clarify
      $endgroup$
      – infinitezero
      Sep 14 at 14:28




      $begingroup$
      Why was this downvoted? Please clarify
      $endgroup$
      – infinitezero
      Sep 14 at 14:28











      7

















      $begingroup$

      Well, if they are literally just humans of the exact same proportions, but scaled up or down, we can use the Square-Cube Law to figure it out in both cases.



      The skinny version is, if I understand this correctly, take this equation:



      V2 = V1 ( l2 / l1 )^3



      where V2 is your new Volume, V1 is the original Volume, l2 is the new length and l1 is the original length, and assume for simplicity's sake that volume exactly correlates with mass, and therefore weight.



      So if a reasonably well-fed human is 6ft tall and 180lbs, then an exact scaled-up giant version at 12ft tall would be 2x the height, and therefore the weight is 180(12/6)^3, or 1,440 lbs. That's a lot.



      Turning this around, if this 6ft, 180lbs human is scaled down to 1ft tall, then we're looking for 180(1/6)^3, which is about 0.83333.



      So your fairies would weigh less than one pound each, with the exception of some who are enormous by fairy standards.



      You can use this to get a rough estimate of weights for all sorts of creatures, big or small. Take an animal that looks the most like what you want to make, plug in its bodily proportions, and presto you have a rough idea of how much the new version should weigh. You'd be surprised just how heavy your giants are and how light the dwarfs are.






      share|improve this answer










      $endgroup$



















        7

















        $begingroup$

        Well, if they are literally just humans of the exact same proportions, but scaled up or down, we can use the Square-Cube Law to figure it out in both cases.



        The skinny version is, if I understand this correctly, take this equation:



        V2 = V1 ( l2 / l1 )^3



        where V2 is your new Volume, V1 is the original Volume, l2 is the new length and l1 is the original length, and assume for simplicity's sake that volume exactly correlates with mass, and therefore weight.



        So if a reasonably well-fed human is 6ft tall and 180lbs, then an exact scaled-up giant version at 12ft tall would be 2x the height, and therefore the weight is 180(12/6)^3, or 1,440 lbs. That's a lot.



        Turning this around, if this 6ft, 180lbs human is scaled down to 1ft tall, then we're looking for 180(1/6)^3, which is about 0.83333.



        So your fairies would weigh less than one pound each, with the exception of some who are enormous by fairy standards.



        You can use this to get a rough estimate of weights for all sorts of creatures, big or small. Take an animal that looks the most like what you want to make, plug in its bodily proportions, and presto you have a rough idea of how much the new version should weigh. You'd be surprised just how heavy your giants are and how light the dwarfs are.






        share|improve this answer










        $endgroup$

















          7















          7











          7







          $begingroup$

          Well, if they are literally just humans of the exact same proportions, but scaled up or down, we can use the Square-Cube Law to figure it out in both cases.



          The skinny version is, if I understand this correctly, take this equation:



          V2 = V1 ( l2 / l1 )^3



          where V2 is your new Volume, V1 is the original Volume, l2 is the new length and l1 is the original length, and assume for simplicity's sake that volume exactly correlates with mass, and therefore weight.



          So if a reasonably well-fed human is 6ft tall and 180lbs, then an exact scaled-up giant version at 12ft tall would be 2x the height, and therefore the weight is 180(12/6)^3, or 1,440 lbs. That's a lot.



          Turning this around, if this 6ft, 180lbs human is scaled down to 1ft tall, then we're looking for 180(1/6)^3, which is about 0.83333.



          So your fairies would weigh less than one pound each, with the exception of some who are enormous by fairy standards.



          You can use this to get a rough estimate of weights for all sorts of creatures, big or small. Take an animal that looks the most like what you want to make, plug in its bodily proportions, and presto you have a rough idea of how much the new version should weigh. You'd be surprised just how heavy your giants are and how light the dwarfs are.






          share|improve this answer










          $endgroup$



          Well, if they are literally just humans of the exact same proportions, but scaled up or down, we can use the Square-Cube Law to figure it out in both cases.



          The skinny version is, if I understand this correctly, take this equation:



          V2 = V1 ( l2 / l1 )^3



          where V2 is your new Volume, V1 is the original Volume, l2 is the new length and l1 is the original length, and assume for simplicity's sake that volume exactly correlates with mass, and therefore weight.



          So if a reasonably well-fed human is 6ft tall and 180lbs, then an exact scaled-up giant version at 12ft tall would be 2x the height, and therefore the weight is 180(12/6)^3, or 1,440 lbs. That's a lot.



          Turning this around, if this 6ft, 180lbs human is scaled down to 1ft tall, then we're looking for 180(1/6)^3, which is about 0.83333.



          So your fairies would weigh less than one pound each, with the exception of some who are enormous by fairy standards.



          You can use this to get a rough estimate of weights for all sorts of creatures, big or small. Take an animal that looks the most like what you want to make, plug in its bodily proportions, and presto you have a rough idea of how much the new version should weigh. You'd be surprised just how heavy your giants are and how light the dwarfs are.







          share|improve this answer













          share|improve this answer




          share|improve this answer










          answered Sep 13 at 21:54









          Maddock EmersonMaddock Emerson

          82413 bronze badges




          82413 bronze badges
























              3

















              $begingroup$

              A 30cm fairy would need a lot less muscle relatively than a normally sized person. (Note that with a normal amount of muscle, they'd be able to jump nearly as high absolutely as a big person). They'd look probably quite skinny, and weigh less than the square-cube law would suggest, maybe 0.3kg.






              share|improve this answer












              $endgroup$



















                3

















                $begingroup$

                A 30cm fairy would need a lot less muscle relatively than a normally sized person. (Note that with a normal amount of muscle, they'd be able to jump nearly as high absolutely as a big person). They'd look probably quite skinny, and weigh less than the square-cube law would suggest, maybe 0.3kg.






                share|improve this answer












                $endgroup$

















                  3















                  3











                  3







                  $begingroup$

                  A 30cm fairy would need a lot less muscle relatively than a normally sized person. (Note that with a normal amount of muscle, they'd be able to jump nearly as high absolutely as a big person). They'd look probably quite skinny, and weigh less than the square-cube law would suggest, maybe 0.3kg.






                  share|improve this answer












                  $endgroup$



                  A 30cm fairy would need a lot less muscle relatively than a normally sized person. (Note that with a normal amount of muscle, they'd be able to jump nearly as high absolutely as a big person). They'd look probably quite skinny, and weigh less than the square-cube law would suggest, maybe 0.3kg.







                  share|improve this answer















                  share|improve this answer




                  share|improve this answer








                  edited Sep 14 at 20:46

























                  answered Sep 14 at 15:11









                  thsths

                  2,7526 silver badges13 bronze badges




                  2,7526 silver badges13 bronze badges
























                      1

















                      $begingroup$

                      Other answers have scaled the persons' mass by the cube of their height, and got answers of about 13 ounces. This is probably a lower bound; it assumes that a human brain can fit into a space slightly larger than a teaspoonful.



                      The theory of "Body Mass Index" (BMI) is that people have the longest life when their mass is roughly proportional to the square of their height. If we start with 6 feet = 180 pounds (a BMI of 24.4 kg/m²), we can extrapolate this to 1 foot = 5 pounds. This is probably an upper bound; it allows a few cubic inches for the brain.



                      An elliptical cylinder of water with a width of 5.4 inches, a height of 12 inches, and a depth of 2.7 inches would have a mass of five pounds. The ellipse's perimeter would be 13 inches, which is quite stout. (6 * 13" is a 78" waist!)



                      An elliptical cylinder of water with a width of 2.2 inches, a height of 12 inches, and a depth of 1.1 inches would have a mass of 13 ounces, and a BMI of 4 kg/m². The ellipse's perimeter would be 5.3 inches, which is scaled down from a 32 inch waist.






                      share|improve this answer












                      $endgroup$










                      • 2




                        $begingroup$
                        Going by BMI is a recipe to estimate a real-life dwarf. If you try to picture your water cylinders, at 1 foot tall we would get a person of cartoon proportions (which might be Ok).
                        $endgroup$
                        – Alexander
                        Sep 14 at 2:22










                      • $begingroup$
                        BMI is entirely the wrong tool here. It doesn't accurately approximate either actual human scaling or theoretical square-cube scaling.
                        $endgroup$
                        – Mark
                        Sep 14 at 23:39















                      1

















                      $begingroup$

                      Other answers have scaled the persons' mass by the cube of their height, and got answers of about 13 ounces. This is probably a lower bound; it assumes that a human brain can fit into a space slightly larger than a teaspoonful.



                      The theory of "Body Mass Index" (BMI) is that people have the longest life when their mass is roughly proportional to the square of their height. If we start with 6 feet = 180 pounds (a BMI of 24.4 kg/m²), we can extrapolate this to 1 foot = 5 pounds. This is probably an upper bound; it allows a few cubic inches for the brain.



                      An elliptical cylinder of water with a width of 5.4 inches, a height of 12 inches, and a depth of 2.7 inches would have a mass of five pounds. The ellipse's perimeter would be 13 inches, which is quite stout. (6 * 13" is a 78" waist!)



                      An elliptical cylinder of water with a width of 2.2 inches, a height of 12 inches, and a depth of 1.1 inches would have a mass of 13 ounces, and a BMI of 4 kg/m². The ellipse's perimeter would be 5.3 inches, which is scaled down from a 32 inch waist.






                      share|improve this answer












                      $endgroup$










                      • 2




                        $begingroup$
                        Going by BMI is a recipe to estimate a real-life dwarf. If you try to picture your water cylinders, at 1 foot tall we would get a person of cartoon proportions (which might be Ok).
                        $endgroup$
                        – Alexander
                        Sep 14 at 2:22










                      • $begingroup$
                        BMI is entirely the wrong tool here. It doesn't accurately approximate either actual human scaling or theoretical square-cube scaling.
                        $endgroup$
                        – Mark
                        Sep 14 at 23:39













                      1















                      1











                      1







                      $begingroup$

                      Other answers have scaled the persons' mass by the cube of their height, and got answers of about 13 ounces. This is probably a lower bound; it assumes that a human brain can fit into a space slightly larger than a teaspoonful.



                      The theory of "Body Mass Index" (BMI) is that people have the longest life when their mass is roughly proportional to the square of their height. If we start with 6 feet = 180 pounds (a BMI of 24.4 kg/m²), we can extrapolate this to 1 foot = 5 pounds. This is probably an upper bound; it allows a few cubic inches for the brain.



                      An elliptical cylinder of water with a width of 5.4 inches, a height of 12 inches, and a depth of 2.7 inches would have a mass of five pounds. The ellipse's perimeter would be 13 inches, which is quite stout. (6 * 13" is a 78" waist!)



                      An elliptical cylinder of water with a width of 2.2 inches, a height of 12 inches, and a depth of 1.1 inches would have a mass of 13 ounces, and a BMI of 4 kg/m². The ellipse's perimeter would be 5.3 inches, which is scaled down from a 32 inch waist.






                      share|improve this answer












                      $endgroup$



                      Other answers have scaled the persons' mass by the cube of their height, and got answers of about 13 ounces. This is probably a lower bound; it assumes that a human brain can fit into a space slightly larger than a teaspoonful.



                      The theory of "Body Mass Index" (BMI) is that people have the longest life when their mass is roughly proportional to the square of their height. If we start with 6 feet = 180 pounds (a BMI of 24.4 kg/m²), we can extrapolate this to 1 foot = 5 pounds. This is probably an upper bound; it allows a few cubic inches for the brain.



                      An elliptical cylinder of water with a width of 5.4 inches, a height of 12 inches, and a depth of 2.7 inches would have a mass of five pounds. The ellipse's perimeter would be 13 inches, which is quite stout. (6 * 13" is a 78" waist!)



                      An elliptical cylinder of water with a width of 2.2 inches, a height of 12 inches, and a depth of 1.1 inches would have a mass of 13 ounces, and a BMI of 4 kg/m². The ellipse's perimeter would be 5.3 inches, which is scaled down from a 32 inch waist.







                      share|improve this answer















                      share|improve this answer




                      share|improve this answer








                      edited Sep 14 at 6:21

























                      answered Sep 13 at 23:33









                      JasperJasper

                      4,08712 silver badges31 bronze badges




                      4,08712 silver badges31 bronze badges










                      • 2




                        $begingroup$
                        Going by BMI is a recipe to estimate a real-life dwarf. If you try to picture your water cylinders, at 1 foot tall we would get a person of cartoon proportions (which might be Ok).
                        $endgroup$
                        – Alexander
                        Sep 14 at 2:22










                      • $begingroup$
                        BMI is entirely the wrong tool here. It doesn't accurately approximate either actual human scaling or theoretical square-cube scaling.
                        $endgroup$
                        – Mark
                        Sep 14 at 23:39












                      • 2




                        $begingroup$
                        Going by BMI is a recipe to estimate a real-life dwarf. If you try to picture your water cylinders, at 1 foot tall we would get a person of cartoon proportions (which might be Ok).
                        $endgroup$
                        – Alexander
                        Sep 14 at 2:22










                      • $begingroup$
                        BMI is entirely the wrong tool here. It doesn't accurately approximate either actual human scaling or theoretical square-cube scaling.
                        $endgroup$
                        – Mark
                        Sep 14 at 23:39







                      2




                      2




                      $begingroup$
                      Going by BMI is a recipe to estimate a real-life dwarf. If you try to picture your water cylinders, at 1 foot tall we would get a person of cartoon proportions (which might be Ok).
                      $endgroup$
                      – Alexander
                      Sep 14 at 2:22




                      $begingroup$
                      Going by BMI is a recipe to estimate a real-life dwarf. If you try to picture your water cylinders, at 1 foot tall we would get a person of cartoon proportions (which might be Ok).
                      $endgroup$
                      – Alexander
                      Sep 14 at 2:22












                      $begingroup$
                      BMI is entirely the wrong tool here. It doesn't accurately approximate either actual human scaling or theoretical square-cube scaling.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Mark
                      Sep 14 at 23:39




                      $begingroup$
                      BMI is entirely the wrong tool here. It doesn't accurately approximate either actual human scaling or theoretical square-cube scaling.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Mark
                      Sep 14 at 23:39


















                      draft saved

                      draft discarded















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Worldbuilding Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid


                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function ()
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f156098%2fhow-much-would-a-1-foot-tall-human-weigh%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown









                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Tamil (spriik) Luke uk diar | Nawigatjuun

                      Align equal signs while including text over equalitiesAMS align: left aligned text/math plus multicolumn alignmentMultiple alignmentsAligning equations in multiple placesNumbering and aligning an equation with multiple columnsHow to align one equation with another multline equationUsing \ in environments inside the begintabularxNumber equations and preserving alignment of equal signsHow can I align equations to the left and to the right?Double equation alignment problem within align enviromentAligned within align: Why are they right-aligned?

                      Training a classifier when some of the features are unknownWhy does Gradient Boosting regression predict negative values when there are no negative y-values in my training set?How to improve an existing (trained) classifier?What is effect when I set up some self defined predisctor variables?Why Matlab neural network classification returns decimal values on prediction dataset?Fitting and transforming text data in training, testing, and validation setsHow to quantify the performance of the classifier (multi-class SVM) using the test data?How do I control for some patients providing multiple samples in my training data?Training and Test setTraining a convolutional neural network for image denoising in MatlabShouldn't an autoencoder with #(neurons in hidden layer) = #(neurons in input layer) be “perfect”?